Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
02/08/2021 09:00 AM Senate EDUCATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: "fy 2021 Student Enrollment Counts & Covid-19 Federal Relief Funding" by Commissioner Michael Johnson. | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 8, 2021
9:01 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Roger Holland, Chair
Senator Gary Stevens, Vice Chair
Senator Shelley Hughes
Senator Peter Micciche
Senator Tom Begich
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATI0N: "FY 2021 STUDENT ENROLLMENT COUNTS & COVID-19
FEDERAL RELIEF FUNDING" BY COMMISSIONER MICHAEL JOHNSON
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
MICHAEL JOHNSON, Ph.D., Commissioner
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an update on student enrollment and
federal COVID-19 funds.
HEIDI TESHNER, Director
Finance and Support Services
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information on student enrollment
and funding.
LACEY SANDERS, Administrative Service Director
Office of the Governor
Office of Management and Budget
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an update of the federal COVID-19
education funds.
ACTION NARRATIVE
9:01:41 AM
CHAIR ROGER HOLLAND called the Senate Education Standing
Committee meeting to order at 9:01 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Hughes, Begich, Micciche, Stevens, and Chair
Holland.
^Presentation: "FY 2021 Student Enrollment Counts & COVID-19
Federal Relief Funding" by Commissioner Michael Johnson.
Presentation: "FY 2021 Student Enrollment Counts & COVID-19
Federal Relief Funding" by Commissioner Michael Johnson.
9:02:18 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND announced that this week the committee will focus
on the funding and learning impacts of COVID-19 on K-12
education in Alaska. This topic is timely and important as the
state navigates the pandemic. His goal is to identify any
unresolved issues that require immediate attention and also to
capture any positive changes that can be used to improve the
learning environment for children.
9:03:04 AM
MICHAEL JOHNSON, Ph.D., Commissioner, Department of Education
and Early Development (DEED), Juneau, Alaska, stated that the
department would provide information about this year's student
count and the changes compared to last year as well as
information related to the almost $200 million in federal
education-related COVID-19 relief funds.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON said that in unprecedented times it is
important to remind oneself of the destination and mission,
which is, "an excellent education for every student every day,"
regardless of circumstances. Today's hearing is a reminder that
even though the circumstances have been trying, the department's
goal and destination is still the same.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON said as the impact of COVID-19 is
identified, and the impact of millions of dollars in relief
funds, it is important to have a reminder of shared priorities,
which come from the Alaska Education Challenge: 1. Support all
students to read at grade level by the end of third grade 2.
Increase career, technical, and culturally relevant education to
meet student and workforce needs 3. Close the achievement gap by
ensuring equitable educational rigor and resources 4. Prepare,
attract, and retain effective education professionals 5. Improve
the safety and well-being of students through school
partnerships with families, communities, and tribes.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON said the priorities provide a post-pandemic
pathway for the education system.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON shared that DEED has the good fortune to
have two of the most experienced finance experts in the state,
Heidi Teshner, Director of School Finance and Facilities, and
Lacey Sanders, Director of Administrative Services. Together,
these two handle one of the largest portions of the state
budget. They are uniquely equipped and qualified to provide the
committee with both current and past budgetary and enrollment
context.
9:06:10 AM
HEIDI TESHNER, Director, Finance and Support Services,
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED), Juneau,
Alaska, said she will provide an overview of FY2021 statewide
enrollment updates and explain the foundation payment process
and address a few additional state-funded programs that are
affected by the enrollment counts.
MS. TESHNER said the legislature has provided a formula in
statute to fund school operational costs, known as the public
school funding formula and more commonly known as the foundation
formula. It was adopted under SB 36 in 1998 and implemented in
1999. It is defined in AS 14.17. The funding for each district
is a combination of state aid, required local contributions, and
federal impact aid. The 19 Rural Education Attendance Areas
(REAA) do not have a local contribution. Furthermore, Southeast
Islands School District receives solely state aid. A school
district is only eligible for foundation formula as calculated
under the formula and set out in AS 14.17.410. The first step in
determining state aid for school district is determining the
ADM, the average daily membership, for each school.
9:08:20 AM
SENATOR HUGHES asked how many times in the last 22 years the
foundation formula has been adjusted and when was the most
recent time. Through the National Conference of State
Legislators (NCSL), she heard that in other states it is not
uncommon to tweak the formula every year or two. Her impression
is that Alaska doesn't do it as often.
MS. TESHNER answered that she would say about 10 times. She
doesn't have the exact number in front of her. It has changed by
adjusting district cost factors, the special education intensive
factor, and by increasing the correspondence factor from 80
percent to the current 90 percent. She can't remember the exact
last update but will get that information.
9:09:40 AM
SENATOR BEGICH shared that the Augenblick study was commissioned
by the legislature in 2015. The legislature under Co-chair
MacKinnon on the Finance Committee requested an audit and review
for a quarter million dollars of the formula by the Augenblick
group out of Colorado. The study concluded the formula with the
exception of changes that were made in subsequent years was in
fairly robust shape. He could get copies of the report to the
committee. Senator MacKinnon adjusted some of the elements of
the formula related to how the state reimburses schools that
have fallen below a certain number. He asked if Ms. Teshner
remembered the law that passed in either 2017 or 2018. Senator
MacKinnon championed adjusting for school population decline.
That was a direct result of Augenblick.
MS. TESHNER responded that that was statute addressing the
consolidation of schools by district choice.
SENATOR BEGICH said that was a direct response to the Augenblick
study to correct what was identified as a mistake in the
formula. The process is somewhat robust.
9:11:32 AM
SENATOR MICCICHE observed that the Alaska legislature lives in
fear of even considering readjusting the BSA (Base Student
Allocation). Getting a comprehensive list of the changes plus
the study would be helpful for the legislature as it analyzes
the potential path forward.
MS. TESHNER responded that she can provide that to the
committee.
MS. TESHNER explained that the ADM is the number of students who
are enrolled during the 20-day school count period that ends the
fourth Friday of October. For the school year 20-21, that ran
from September 28 to October 23, 2020. In order to determine
state aid, districts must submit their student count data, or
their average daily membership, to the department within two
weeks after the count period ends, which was November 6, 2020.
The student data from the count period is the starting point for
calculating state aid for school districts.
MS. TESHNER displayed the table on slide 8 as the FY2021 OASIS
[Online Alaska School Information System] update. The data is as
of December 18, 2020. The table compares the FY21 projected
student data and the actual count data. The FY22 projected data
is also shown and compared to the FY21 OASIS numbers. The FY21
projected data is data that districts provided to the department
in November of 2019. These counts were used to prepare the
governor's FY21 budget. That projected data is used for
budgeting purposes only at the statewide level. At the November
18, 2020, joint Education Committee hearing, the department
provided the joint committee with the FY21 preliminary data,
which was the unreconciled data from the 20-day count period
that ended in October. That preliminary data was subject to
change after department review. The review process included
removing all duplications ensuring that no student receives more
than one average daily membership count, and then the special
education intensive reviews. The FY21 OASIS updated numbers are
the result of that review. The department had over 1,500
duplicates from all districts. About half of that, about 768,
were unique student id numbers duplicated in the system. That is
double that of previous years. The department is still reviewing
the special education intensive student count and so there could
still be changes, but the ADM numbers being presented today are
pretty much final. The final dollar amount could be subject to
change. The FY22 projected data districts submitted to the
department in November 2020 was used to prepare the governor's
FY22 budget.
9:16:22 AM
MS. TESHNER said the FY21 OASIS regular ADM, the brick-and-
mortar students, decreased 15,352.91, or about a 13 percent
decline compared the FY 21 projected data. FY21 OASIS
correspondence ADM increased 13,445.80, a 94.9 percent increase
over the FY21 projected data. The overall total ADM decreased
only 1,907.11, or 1.5 percent compared to the FY21 projected
data. The adjusted ADM has increased 5,698.09, or a 2.2 percent
increase over the FY 21 projected data.
MS. TESHNER said that slide 10 of the presentation provides a
glance at the factors used to determine the adjusted ADM. That
includes applying the school size factor to the count,
addressing hold harmless, followed by the district cost factors,
special needs factor, vocational and technical education factor,
special education intensives, and correspondence ADM. This will
be addressed later in the presentation. The adjustment for
school size, the hold harmless provision, and the shift in
correspondence are the main reasons for the increase in ADM.
9:18:08 AM
SENATOR BEGICH asked if the decline of 1,907[for total ADM]
means about 2,000 fewer students being counted. Some of that
comes from migration out of Alaska. He asked if there any
students who have slipped through the cracks, are there any
missing students who are not in correspondence or brick-and-
mortar schools but haven't left the state.
MS. TESHNER replied that the department did do an analysis to
figure out where students might have gone. Unless they are
enrolled in a public school, the department does not know if
they have left the state or gone to a private homeschool program
or other private school. The department has determined that
there are more fractional ADMs than in recent years. Four
student ids can equal one ADM if they are each a quarter time.
There are almost 12,000 new Alaska student ids assigned since
last year. A lot of those are pre-Ks, kindergarteners and first
graders. The department doesn't know how many students have gone
to a private school or have left the state.
9:20:20 AM
SENATOR HUGHES asked if there is any process as students exit a
school to ask where they are headed.
MS. TESHNER replied that if students transfer to another school
there is transfer paperwork that the exiting school sends to the
new school district. She would assume that is the same for going
to a private school from a public school, but she does not know
that for a fact. That could be a good question to ask the school
districts when they are in committee later this week.
9:21:24 AM
SENATOR STEVENS pointed out that this is an enormous problem
that will have major repercussions for school districts and the
department. He has heard superintendents talk about ghost
students. He has heard his grandchildren talk about students who
were in their online classes who just disappeared. It should be
obvious to everyone that this is an enormous problem, all of
these ghost students and what will the state do to make sure
that this is not a lost year for them.
9:22:11 AM
SENATOR MICCICHE shared that he is trying to understand the
adjusted ADM. The hold harmless provision for a five percent
[decrease in enrollment] or more is 75 percent the first year.
He asked if the impacts of COVID were to continue throughout FY
21, and schools dropped down to the 50 percent, whether this
bottom line number is going to look much different.
MS. TESHNER answered that slide 9 will walk through the hold
harmless provision but, yes, if the trends were to continue,
that line for the projected FY 22 could change. That is also
subject to change based on the actual count that the department
will get in November of 2021.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if she has calculated that if the trend
continues. He asked if she has some analysis to show what the
funding difference may look like once schools get into the 50
percent for the second year.
MS. TESHNER responded that department hasn't done any projected
comparison other than the projected data on slide 8. Districts
project whether students will come back to the brick-and-mortar
schools or stay in correspondence. If students stay below the
base year for hold harmless, that 50 percent calculation would
already be reflected in the projected number.
9:24:24 AM
SENATOR HUGHES clarified that she wants to be sure that she is
correct in thinking that if 10 students were in brick-and-mortar
schools and then they went to public correspondence schools, the
schools are getting the 90 percent [correspondence] rate and if
the district is held harmless for the regular ADM, the state, in
a sense, is paying for those students twice, once at the full
rate and once at the 90 percent rate.
MS. TESHNER answered that that is correct. Districts have
experienced that. For example, Mat-Su lost kids in the brick-
and-mortar schools who went to the Mat-Su Central School. That
triggered hold harmless and Mat-Su also gets paid for those
students through the correspondence count.
MS. TESHNER addressed the hold harmless provision with slide 9.
The provision was enacted in 2008 under HB 273. It is for those
districts experiencing a reduction in their ADM for brick-and-
mortar schools after ADM is adjusted for school size.
Eligibility is determined after the district's adjusted-for-
school-size ADM is calculated and totaled for all schools. It is
a district-wide total. The sum total of the district's ADM,
adjusted for school size, is compared to the prior fiscal year's
ADM, adjusted for school size, to determine if a decrease of 5
percent or greater has occurred. If the answer is yes, then the
prior fiscal year is looked at as the base year for the next
three years. The new school size, adjusted for hold harmless,
continues through the formula adjustments, which will be
addressed on the next slide. This results in approximately 75
percent of the basic need calculation being restored in the
first year. The hold harmless provision is available to school
districts over a three-year step-down of 75 percent the first
year, 50 percent the second year, and 25 percent in the final
year, provided that the adjusted-for-school-size ADM stays below
that established base year. This three-year step-down allows
time for districts to adjust to the decreased funding that comes
with the decrease in their brick-and-mortar ADM. If hold
harmless is triggered in 21 and then districts have another 5
percent decrease in FY22, districts have a choice to continue to
the 50 percent or they can restart their hold harmless. It is a
case-by-case situation. Districts usually choose the higher of
the two amounts.
9:27:52 AM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked about determining the base year if there
is another 5 percent decrease.
MS. TESHNER answered that if FY 20 is the base year, if another
5 percent decrease occurs in FY22, the base year becomes FY21
and the district can start the 75 percent in FY22 or continue on
with the 50 percent, keeping FY 20 as the base year.
MS. TESHNER said that slide 10 provides the outline of the
formula. After the student data is reported, the ADM for each
school is calculated by applying the school size factor to that
count according to the table in AS 14.17.410 and then the
product of that calculation is then used as a factor in the next
step of the formula. All in all, AS 14.17.410 sets out the
remaining steps. The graph on this slide shows the statutory
reference for each factor for quick reference. The tables on
slide 10 and slide 11 give an overview of the formula and the
multipliers that are used to determine state aid. Slide 10 is
how to get to the district adjusted ADM. Slide 11 finishes the
formula and shows the funding side. The district adjusted ADM is
multiplied by the base student allocation (BSA), which is
$5,930, and that is the basic need. Three components pay for
basic need, required local contribution, impact aid, and state
aid, plus quality schools. That is the total state entitlement.
The document Public School Funding Program Overview that is on
the DEED website explains the calculations in more detail. That
could be provided to the committee.
9:31:31 AM
MS. TESHNER noted that she wanted to address the funding side of
slide 12, FY2021 Statewide Enrollment Comparison. The FY2021
OASIS updated numbers, compared to the FY21 projected numbers,
show a net increase of $25 million, a 2 percent increase. This
is a $25 million increase over the current year's [projected]
budget. Within these numbers, 25 school districts are estimated
to receive increased state aid. That total is about $54.5
million. And 29 school districts will receive decreased state
aid, totaling about $29.4 million. The difference is the $25
million net increase. FY21 is $38,151.6 million or 3.1 percent
more than what was paid out last year [FY2020 Actual]. With
those numbers, thirty-five school districts are estimated to
receive increased state aid totaling about $56.1 million and the
remaining 19 school districts are estimated to receive decreased
state aid, about $21.3 million less. Later slides take a closer
look at the ADM and foundation counts as well as the COVID-19
federal relief funds and the FY21 operating fund balance data
for the 11 school districts the committee will hear from later
in the week.
SENATOR HUGHES clarified that the increase of $38 million does
not include federal COVID dollars coming to the districts.
MS. TESHNER answered that is correct. It is just the increase
from student enrollment.
MS. TESHNER said that slide 13, Foundation Payments Process,
gives an overview of how the payments are processed. AS
14.17.610(a) outlines that process. Payments are processed on a
monthly basis. Payments for the first nine months of the fiscal
year are calculated based on the prior fiscal year's foundation.
So, for the first nine months of FY21, July through March are
paid on the final FY20 foundation. The remaining three months,
April, May, and June, are recalculated and trued up based on the
finalized, current year foundation counts.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked about the numbers for the last three
payments.
MS. TESHNER replied that the department has been paying on FY20
actuals. The department will true up the $25 million increase in
the April, May, and June payments.
MS. TESHNER explained that slide 14, Additional State-Funded
Formula Programs, addresses the other state programs that will
also be affected by the school year 2020-2021 student enrollment
data. Those include pupil transportation and the residential
schools program. The pupil transportation grant is based on a
statutory formula in AS 14.09.010. A district's ADM, less the
correspondence students ADM, is multiplied by the per student
amount set out in statute. The FY21 appropriation was almost $77
million. The estimated FY21 grants is estimated to be about
$65.3 million, so a decrease of $11.65 million, or 15 percent
decrease, over the prior year. Fewer students in brick-and-
mortar buildings means fewer dollars to districts for their
student transportation programs.
9:38:12 AM
SENATOR BEGICH shared that a bus rate is paid that is figured as
a cost factor related to minimum wage. He has generally
supported a minimum wage increase, but it would have a dramatic
impact on the bus wages. He asked if increasing minimum wage
would have an impact on this.
MS. TESHNER answered that would be at the district level. The
department's grant amount won't change unless statute is changed
to reflect that. When a district renews its contract, it would
have to apply the minimum wage factor. If it is a school
district-operated program, it would be an immediate increase. It
would be a hit to a district's transportation program. The
department grant level would continue as is with no adjustment
unless a statute is amended.
SENATOR BEGICH noted the possibility of unintended consequences.
The legislature should be aware of this. Usually a contract for
a bus driver is a factor of whatever the existing minimum wage
is and the Alaska minimum wage is driven by the federal minimum
wage to some degree. It is something to be aware of.
MS. TESHNER explained that the residential schools program
funding is also determined by a statutory formula set out in AS
14.16.200. There is a residential stipend, a per pupil monthly
stipend that is multiplied by nine months and then multiplied by
the actual student count. In addition, there is reimbursement
for one round-trip transportation per student, which must be the
least expensive means between the student's community and the
school. For FY21, the appropriation for the residential schools
program was about $8,275,700. The estimated actual for FY21 is
$2,363,600, a decrease of $5.9 million or 71 percent. In a
normal year, nine school districts operate 10 approved programs.
This year only four residential schools were operating, but at a
reduced capacity. Galena, which is a year-round program, has 47
students attending but is approved for up to 210, which is a 78
percent decrease. Lower Yukon has a variable term program with
42 students attending. They are approved for up to 50, so a 16
percent decrease. Nenana has a year-round program and has 49
students attending. They are approved for up to 100 students, so
a 51 percent decrease. Northwest Arctic, which has a variable
and year-long program, has 8 students attending and is approved
for 40, so an 80 percent decrease. All of this is less money for
that program.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked, after the hold harmless breakdown and
lack of protection with student transport and residential
programs, what the funding differences look like for each of the
districts. That would be useful information as the legislature
evaluates a funding path forward this year. It would be nice to
understand the impact on individual districts, before COVID
relief.
MS. TESHNER replied that can be provided to the committee.
9:43:43 AM
SENATOR BEGICH observed that that number is an anomaly related
to the COVID-19 outbreak and people not going to the schools
because of safety issues. He asked Ms. Teshner if she expected
this anomaly to continue if the COVID-19 pandemic is largely
under control.
MS. TESHNER responded that if the trend is that students will go
back to brick-and-mortar schools, then, yes, this an anomaly.
The decrease in student transportation would only occur this
year. The same thing is resolved and schools open to full
capacity the residential schools would go back to the normal
levels.
SENATOR HUGHES noted that because of COVID-19 only 30 percent of
what was appropriated for residential schools was spent. She
would have thought the same thing would be true for pupil
transportation because so many brick-and-mortar schools were
closed. She asked if contracts for bus drivers were paid even
though schools were closed and students were not being
transported. She is surprised that the amount is $65 million out
of $76 [million] when her understanding is that most school
districts had brick-and-mortar schools closed.
MS. TESHNER replied that the pupil transportation grant is based
on a statutory formula. Whether schools are open or not, the
department, assuming there is a legislative appropriation, would
pay based on that statute, which is brick-and-mortar students
multiplied by the per student cost. Districts still have pupil
transportation costs, even if they are not running. Typically,
pupil transportation contracts have a clause to pay at a reduced
rate if buses are not running. Each district has a different
contract. If it is a district-run pupil transportation program,
it would be different. It is entirely up to the district to
choose to pay their bus drivers, which the department encourages
them to do, assuming schools are open.
9:47:06 AM
SENATOR HUGHES observed that the amount calculated automatically
goes to school districts and whether a school district is paying
a diminished rate is up to each school. She asked if a school
that is not paying is allowed to use those transportation funds
for other purposes.
MS. TESHNER answered yes, unfortunately they could do that. The
department would pay for the pupil transportation program and
districts would reflect that in their special revenue fund for
the pupil transportation program. They would need to show a
transfer out to another fund. The department will not see the
specific purchase if it is moved to the operating fund but it
would show that the money was removed from the transportation
fund into the operating fund.
SENATOR HUGHES asked if the department knows how much of the $65
million was not used for pupil transportation.
MS. TESHNER answered that the department won't know how much
money was transferred out of pupil transportation funds until it
receives the districts' audit in November of 2021.
CHAIR HOLLAND commented that if he understands correctly, some
schools may have lost enrollment but stayed open and still had
to run the same routes.
MS. TESHNER responded that is correct. Some districts were up
and running with reduced ridership, but the route costs do not
change in that circumstance. She then turned the presentation
over to Ms. Sanders.
9:49:58 AM
LACEY SANDERS, Administrative Service Director, Office of the
Governor, Office of Management and Budget, Juneau, Alaska, began
with slide 16, saying that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law on March 27,
2020, and appropriated $30.75 billion into the Education
Stabilization Fund, divided among the Elementary and Secondary
School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER I Fund), the Governor's
Emergency Education Relief Fund (GEER I Fund), and the Higher
Education Emergency Relief Fund. The University of Alaska would
be the appropriate body to speak to the higher education fund.
MS. SANDERS said that slide 17 showed the state of Alaska's
allocation for ESSER I and GEER I. The allocation for ESSER was
$38.4 million, divided into two separate parts; ninety percent
went to Local Education Agencies (school districts) and the rest
went to the State Education Agency (DEED). School districts have
until September 30, 2022, to obligate the funds. As of January
29, 2021, school districts requested reimbursement for $11.3
million and $22.8 million has been encumbered for approved
school districts budgets based on an approved application. The
department is working on budget requests for FY 21 and will
continue until FY 22 and FY 23. DEED received $3.8 million to
grant award or contracts to address emergency needs resulting
from the COVID-19 pandemic. The total allocation for GEER I was
$6.5 million. The purpose is to provide emergency assistance as
a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. This funding is available for
the governor to allocate at his discretion, which is shown in
slide 17.
MS. SANDERS said that slide 18 summarizes Coronavirus Response
and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act, which was
signed into law December 27, 2020. It deposited $82 billion into
the Education Stabilization Fund. Approximately $4.1 billion was
for the GEER II Fund. Approximately $54.3 billion was for the
ESSER II Fund. Approximately $21.7 billion was for the Higher
Education Emergency Relief Fund. These funds are accounted for
differently and are available for different uses and periods of
availability.
SENATOR BEGICH recalled that CARES Act funding is not allowed to
supplant funding, but CRRSA does allow that. He asked for more
detail about supplementing vs. supplanting.
MS. SANDERS answered that he is correct. CRRSA allows for
maximum flexibility. Since she is not an expert on supplant vs.
supplement, she did not want to speak too broadly to that. She
offered to follow up with additional information.
MS. SANDERS displayed the state of Alaska's ESSER II funding on
slide 19. The total state ESSER II funding was $159.7 million.
The largest allocation, $143.7 million, went to local education
agencies (school districts). School districts have until
September 30, 2023, to obligate the funds, which may be used for
expenditures dating back to March 2020. The department is
working on applications and anticipating that it will be
available to school districts in mid-February. The state
education agency received $15.2 million to award for grants or
contracts. This funding is also available through September 30,
2023. ESSER II has an expanded list of allowable activities
compared to the CARES Act, including addressing learning loss
among students, summer programming, school facility repairs and
improvements to reduce the risk of virus transmission, and
improvement of air quality in school facilities.
MS. SANDERS noted that during a Legislative Budget and Audit
meeting on January 18, 2021, several legislators had questions
about water system upgrades and investments in Internet or
broadband infrastructure. Federal guidance does provide the
following allowances on this money. For broadband and
infrastructure, ESSER II allows for purchasing educational
technology, including software, hardware, and connectivity for
students who are served by the local education agency that aids
in the regular and substantive educational interaction between
students and classroom instructors, including low-income
students and children with disabilities, which may include
assistive technology, adaptive equipment, as well as planning,
coordinating, and implementing activities during long-term
closures, including providing meals for eligible students,
providing technology for online learning for all students,
providing guidance for carrying out requirements under IDEA and
ensuring other educational services can continue to be provided
consistent with all federal, state, and local requirements.
Regarding water system upgrades, the federal guidance does allow
for school facility repairs and improvements to enable
operations of school to reduce the risk of virus transmission
and exposure to environmental health hazards, and to support
student health needs. School districts can determine how to the
funding will be used. The department reviews the school
districts' proposed plans and requests for reimbursement to
ensure that they are for allowable uses. DEED assists all school
districts with determining allowable uses based on federal
guidance. The department provides FAQs and documents on its
website to allow all districts to receive the same response.
SENATOR BEGICH observed that for years, the major maintenance
list for school facilities have included HVAC systems and those
types of things. That obviously preceded COVID-19 but would
clearly be impacted by COVID-19. He asked whether the
improvement of HVAC systems would be eligible under this
funding.
MS. SANDERS replied that as long as they are meeting the
guidance, which says that to reduce the risk of virus
transmission and exposure to environmental health hazards.
School districts decide how the funds will be spent. The
department cannot tell districts what to do, but it can help to
find allowable uses for that funding.
10:01:00 AM
SENATOR STEVENS opined that the summer programming is crucial to
catch students who have fallen through the cracks. He
understands that it is up to the districts how to use the money,
but he is concerned about DEED's involvement in that. He asked
if the department will need additional staff and be make
recommendations, or leave it totally in the hands of the school
districts.
MS. SANDERS replied school districts do decide how the funding
that comes to the district will be utilized and the state
department of education will address learning loss and will work
on ways to meet the summer learning loss as well.
SENATOR STEVENS characterized that as a crucial issue that needs
direct department involvement. He asked for the legislature to
be kept abreast and informed about how the department is trying
to coordinate summer programs throughout the state.
MS. SANDERS responded absolutely.
10:02:37 AM
MS. SANDERS said that slide 20 show the state's GEER II funding,
which is just under $8.2 million and broken into two pieces. The
first is the governor's supplemental allocation of $2.8 million.
The uses are similar for GEER I. They include preventing,
preparing for, and responding to COVID-19. The governor has
discretion for awarding the funding and has not provided
guidance at this time. The second piece is a new provision, the
Emergency Assistance for Non-Public Schools, with an allocation
of $5.4 million. This funding will be award to non-public
schools in partnership with the DEED. The application for the
funding will be available by the deadline of February 12, 2021.
Non-public schools are not required to register with DEED, which
makes it difficult to provide a comprehensive list of eligible
schools. The committee has a handout which does list the non-
public schools that have been identified in Alaska. DEED
conducted an extensive search. There may be additional eligible
schools identified.
MS. SANDERS displayed graphs on slide 21 of Total Education
Stabilization Funds. One graph shows ESSER and the other shows
GEER. The committee has several documents showing details of the
CARES and CRRSA funding and total expenditures by school
districts. Two additional handouts provide a deeper dive into
how school districts are spending their funds.
SENATOR BEGICH asked about the GEER II money shown on slide 20.
Ms. Sanders had noted that the governor has not determined how
to use the $2.8 million in supplemental funding. He asked if
there is a general idea of how that will be used. He clarified
that Ms. Sanders had said the use will be consistent with the
governor's state of the state address.
MS. SANDERS responded that that was in reference to the summer
school program. The department has not received guidance. The
governor has a longer period, perhaps a year, to obligate and
award that funding. It is just too soon to say.
10:07:01 AM
SENATOR BEGICH requested the commissioner and department provide
that information to the committee when it is available.
MS. SANDERS affirmed that they will.
10:07:26 AM
MS. SANDERS reviewed Additional CARES Act Allocations on slide
22. DEED received other funding allocations for child nutrition
programs, Libraries, Archives, and Museums, and the Alaska State
Council on the Arts.
SENATOR STEVENS shared that that he is concerned that summer
school is only a few months away. That could be the harbinger of
success or failure for students. Many students have disappeared.
It is essential that they have the opportunity for summer
school. He has no concerns about the larger districts being able
to handle that. They are making plans now. He is concerned about
the smaller districts and how they will prepare for summer
programming. He would like to know what the department will do
to make that the smaller districts are prepared and can have
successful summer school programs. He will be watching that
carefully.
MS. SANDERS deferred to the commissioner to respond.
10:10:45 AM
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON replied that the department has been
thinking about it and preparing, even before it knew this other
round of money was coming. The school improvement team has been
working on how to help districts, even with "summer school in a
box" that would include recommended curriculum, scheduling, and
a checklist to prepare. Some districts may be undergoing a
transition in leadership, so the department wants to be there to
support students. Other districts may need less support. The
department is actively working on that and readying information
and resources to send to districts. The comprehensive center
through SERRC [Alaska's Educational Service Agency] and the
Alaska Staff Development Network are hosting webinars on that.
The department will be supporting districts in the coming weeks.
SENATOR STEVENS shared that he had every confidence that the
commissioner was preparing for that. There are only a few months
left. He asked the commissioner to keep the committee informed,
especially about the department is reaching those smaller
districts.
SENATOR BEGICH asked if DEED has done any research on the impact
of the receipt and expenditure of federal dollars if the state
is not under an emergency order.
10:13:29 AM
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON answered that he can ask the Department of
Law. The department has asked some of those questions. As
everyone knows, even more money is almost certainly coming from
the federal government, probably even more support than was in
the last CARES package. He is not aware of any hindrance to
districts receiving money based on the declaration. What could
be an issue is that last year the governor allowed districts to
carryover more than 10 percent of their funding. As the
committee heard, the CARES Act money is available over multiple
years. Commissioner Johnson will strongly recommend that that
happen again. The governor can only do that under a disaster
declaration; otherwise, the legislature will have to pass
statute to allow districts to do that. DEED applied for every
waiver possible for districts to carry over federal money, which
many did. The only impact that he knows of is the inability to
carry over 10 percent, which many districts would need to do to
get the maximum benefit out of the money.
MS. TESHNER went on to District Snapshots, starting with slide
23. The slides give a closer look for the ADM and foundation
formula and balance funds, as well as federal COVID-19 funding,
for the 11 districts that will come before the committee later
this week. There will be 10 superintendents because one oversees
two districts.
MS. TESHNER said she would not go over all the slides but would
explain slide 24 about the Aleutian Region School District. She
explained the top table layout is the same as in slide 12, for
the statewide data, but this is just for the district listed.
The left-hand side table at the bottom shows the CARES Act
allocations and expenditures as of January 28, 2021, as well as
for the CRSSA Act. School districts have not received or spent
CRSSA money yet. The Aleutian Region does not accept Title I
funds, so it does not qualify for a CRSSA allocation, but the
department has given additional funding out the state's
reservation funds. This is also true for the Pelican and Skagway
districts, so these districts do have additional money for
COVID-19 expenditures. The lower right-hand table is the FY2020
Operating Fund Balance, broken out between the reserved and
unreserved portions. As the commissioner stated, the governor
waived the statute to allow districts to carryover more than 10
percent of their ending unreserved fund balance for FY2020. Not
all districts had enough to go over the 10 percent. In total, 26
districts had enough unreserved fund balance from FY2020 to
carry over into FY2021. That is the layout for each of the 11
districts shown on the slides.
SENATOR MICCICHE noted that the CRSSA funding application opens
February 15. These slides do not give a complete snapshot
considering that there is almost $144 million that will be
available through CRSSA. He asked if she has any idea what the
level of interest is and how that will affect the bottom line
for individual districts.
MS. TESHNER clarified that the department does not know how
districts want to spend their money because the application
period is not open. It could be assumed that it will be similar
to how they spent CARES funds, but it is up to the districts.
SENATOR MICCICHE replied that it is just that if the $144
million is applied somewhat similarly to other allocations, that
that will change the bottom line significantly for each
district. Many legislators and folks in the community could not
believe that districts would ask for a hold harmless when the
population they are serving was dramatically reduced because of
COVID. However, people are not aware that the hold harmless
provision is law. He is trying to bring together what the
ultimate bottom lines may look like for the various district and
make constituents aware that hold harmless is not something that
is being asked for this year. Statute would have to be changed
for the districts not to be held harmless on the effects of
COVID and the reduced ADM.
10:22:56 AM
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON clarified the question. For example,
Aleutian Region slide does not show the second CARES Act because
it doesn't get Title I money. The department made up for that.
On slide 24, the Bering Strait snapshot does reflect what it
will get out of the $143 million, which is $5.1 million for the
CRSSA Act. The slides and committee handouts have the breakdown
of what districts are getting for CRSSA. The state does not know
the exact amount for the third package that may pass Congress.
The hold harmless provision is in statute. That has been applied
and used in years before the pandemic. That is not a request
outside of long-standing practice. When he was superintendent,
his district fell into a hold harmless scenario and used that
for over four years as a gradual stepdown in funding. Some
districts qualify for hold harmless. When the federal relief
funding is added, then the situation can be looked at across the
board to see the overall impact for districts. The department is
still analyzing it. There are transportation and other funds to
factor in. The executive director of the Alaska Council of
School Administrators, Lisa Parady, sent a letter asking for a
floor based on FY19 projections and no ceiling or limit to
funding. Based on the department's initial analysis, all but
seven districts are at or above that floor with operating funds.
The department continues to analyze that and work with the
superintendents' association to determine the impact of the past
year.
SENATOR STEVENS asked the commissioner to clarify the impact on
education if a disaster declaration is not in place. He asked
how important it is if districts could not carryover funds.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON answered that it would vary by districts.
He would venture to say that it would be very impactful. If
there is another potential large CARES package with flexibility
about how and when to spend the money, it is important to give
districts the flexibility to manage resources to benefit
students for the next few years. That is the intent of these
relief packages. It does address immediate years but recognizes
the impact going forward. By allowing district to waive that, it
gives them flexibility to manage these funds in the most
efficient and effective ways possible. Districts are already
asking if that will be available as they make plans. When he
answered the question earlier, his response was focused on the
federal funds. If there are negative impacts from the lack of a
disaster declaration in other areas, such as vaccines or
testing, it all contributes to getting schools reopened.
Although it is not directly an impact for his department and
doesn't affect the funding, it could impact schools districts
depending on the municipality.
10:28:22 AM
SENATOR STEVENS said he believes any information the
commissioner could provide on the loss of the declaration would
be crucial.
SENATOR HUGHES said that if the emergency disaster declaration
were not extended, the legislature could fix the 10 percent
carryover statutorily. When the commissioner was a
superintendent, hold harmless came into play, but it is atypical
now because the population in a community is not necessarily
shrinking because students are moving from brick-and-mortar to
correspondence. In the commissioner's situation, the district
was probably losing students and not paying for students twice,
as they are now with the hold harmless provision and the 90
percent rate for correspondence students. She asked the
commissioner if he would agree.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON answered that when he was a superintendent
and hold harmless came into play, it was because of a drop in
enrollment because of a drop of population in the community. The
hold harmless statute did not conceive of a situation like the
state is in now. It is not necessarily a drop in population but
a change in enrollment. Some students have gone from a brick-
and-mortar program to a correspondence program or they have left
a district and enrolled in a correspondence program in a
different district.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON concluded by stating that the department
appreciated the opportunity to be in front of the committee that
day and he appreciated the committee giving school districts the
opportunity to present later in the week.
10:31:55 AM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Holland adjourned the Senate Education Standing Committee
at 10:31 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 2.8.2021 (S)EDC DEED Handout 1 of 4 - Education Stabilization Fund - District Allocations.pdf |
SEDC 2/8/2021 9:00:00 AM |
|
| 2.8.2021 (S)EDC DEED Handout 2 of 4 - District CARES Act Expenditures as of 1.28.2021.pdf |
SEDC 2/8/2021 9:00:00 AM |
|
| 2.8.2021 (S)EDC DEED Handout 4 of 4 - FY2021 District CARES Act (ESSERF & GEERF) Expenditures Details.pdf |
SEDC 2/8/2021 9:00:00 AM |
|
| 2.8.2021 (S)EDC DEED Handout 3 of 4 - FY2020 District CARES Act (ESSERF & GEERF) Expenditures Details.pdf |
SEDC 2/8/2021 9:00:00 AM |
|
| 2.8.2021 (S)EDC DEED Student Enrollment and COVID Funding Relief Update.pdf |
SEDC 2/8/2021 9:00:00 AM |